There Is Nothing for You Here: Finding Opportunity in the Twenty-First Century

Prominent expert on Russia Fiona Hill’s There’s Nothing for You Here: Finding Opportunity in the 21st Century (2021) asserts that the United States is on the same path as modern Russia. Hill uses her life experiences to examine the issues that brought US democracy so close to the brink of ending, and she explores methods that can be used to buttress our institutions in the future.

Summary

Part 1: “The Coal House” is about Hill’s childhood and the educational trajectory that launched her career. Fiona Hill grew up in Bishop Auckland, a mining town in northeast England. Her family was working class, and they often struggled to pay the bills. Bishop Auckland, affectionately dubbed Bish, was once a center of industry. However, following World War II and the collapse of industrial labor, Bishop Auckland’s mines closed, making opportunities scarce. The great mining town of Hill’s grandparents became a byword for low social class. The only way to improve her circumstances was through education, and Hill took school very seriously, earning a place at St. Andrews, studying abroad in the USSR, and eventually getting a graduate degree at Harvard. Hill’s hard work, lucky timing, and the help of mentors allowed her social mobility she argues isn’t available anymore.

Part 2: “A Divided House” focuses on the economic, social, and political trajectories of the US, UK, and Russia. Hill’s initial assumptions about US egalitarianism proved to be wrong: For her, the United States did live up to its image as the land of opportunity, but she realized just how much this wasn’t true for other people, since race, gender, class, and geography unfairly contribute to outcomes and social mobility. Geographic disparities are a problem in all three countries: Whether a person lives in a remote part of Russia or the US, their opportunities will be limited. Class inequities are also prevalent in each nation. Everywhere, women find it hard to be taken seriously, earn equal pay, and have a voice without being demeaned—though Russia may the worst for women, where they’re often openly judged solely for their appearance. In the United States, however, one factor remains more influential than others: Racism has a pervasive hold on US systems. People with more than one of these marginalized identities face even greater struggles. Hill argues that Millennials are the most affected—they have weathered crisis after crisis and have the burden of student debt around their necks. The very means that liberated Hill—education—has impeded their generation.

In Part 3: “The White House,” Hill describes her experience working with the Trump administration. She draws a direct line between social immobility and the rise of populists like former President Donald Trump and President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin. When people feel hopeless and see no way out of their situations, as many people do today in the United States, they turn towards radical candidates who speak directly to them and their interests: People who propose clear, simple solutions to their problems, often relying on a scapegoat. Psychologically, it’s not surprising that people want to turn insular to address the cause of their woes; supporting a leader who subverts the systems that haven’t served them seems all the better.

Hill argues that many of Trump’s supporters looked past his flaws and rhetoric because he offered them something they desperately wanted: to blow the system up. People want real, dramatic change that improves their daily lives, and populists promise that. While Hill notes the striking similarities between Trump and Putin’s appeal, she notes a critical difference: Putin offered a vision of a unified, strong national identity to Russia, while Trump offered a different kind of nationalism by exploiting partisanship and widening preexisting divides. Although Hill had a contentious relationship with Trump, she sympathizes with his motivations for building a relationship with Putin: to close the nuclear deal started by Reagan in the 1980s to create a more secure future. The problem was that Trump handling policy purely based on nepotism and flattery. When someone crossed him, he’d eliminate them. The covid pandemic compounded and expedited tensions. Though the Capitol protesters failed in their aims and a more traditional politician won the presidency, Hill notes that Putin recognizes and intends to exploit the political weaknesses of the US.

In Part 4: “Our House,” Hill proposes solutions to prevent the United States (and UK) from falling prey to populists who threaten the foundations of democracy. She suggests everyone has a part to play, including the federal government, local communities, and individuals. While those with the greatest resources (time and money) can and must contribute the most, everyone can take practical steps to increase the availability of opportunities, and in turn, make communities better. There is no magic wand to wave to prevent the US from becoming like modern Russia, but it’s not too late to act. The fate of the US is in citizens’ hands, and the choices made now will shape its future.